Longlegs (2024)

 

I saw this film with high hopes, fueled by good word of mouth from several members of my blogging community, and it's surprising performance at the box office. I love Nicolas Cage, and I am always willing to give him wide latitude on his acting choices because they are so out there. I had not seen a trailer for the film before I went, so the only thing I was aware of were the comparisons some had made to "Silence of the Lambs" and "Seven". Brother, are these people overselling this pile of excrement. I started having doubts a few minutes in, and by the time the film was done, I loathed it. Sorting your sock drawer is a more productive use of two hours.

The film starts out as a procedural, but quickly turns into a supernatural thriller when our hero turns out to be psychic. No wait, she is only half psychic because she only scored 50% on a test that the FBI has for supposed psychics. So we are plunged into a world with no worldbuilding, almost immediately. Agent Lee Harker fingers a house where the bad guy is, by just looking around. We don't actually know why they are in this neighborhood in the first place, but whatever. A tragedy occurs when the partner she has been assigned to, ignores her warning and request for back up. The two of them feel like the most inept FBI agents ever, they will fit right in with the Secret Service team that was supposed to be protecting Trump. They are not sympathetic, they are pitiable. 

Just to add to the stupidity, her supervising agent, is an alcoholic who has been working the serial killer case they are on, for a dozen years without any progress. Whether he is incapable of reading her social reticence or is simply pushing her to grow, he comes across as completely thoughtless. When he forces her to meet his family, the director might just has well hung a sign over the front door which reads" Here lives the family That will be targeted at the end of the film". It was such a ham fisted moment it probably tainted everything for me for the rest of the film. In truth though, nothing happens in the first part of the movie that gives this any verisimilitude. Harker comes across as a naif, rather than a steely mind in the FBI. The production design also undermines the film. The time period is set in the 1990s for no particular reason. The location is supposed to be the Seattle area, but making the FBI offices look like log cabins or paneled walls from the 70s seem amateurish. 

The three performances that matter the most are inconsistent. Maike Monroe who plays Harker, is doe eyed and a waif. Even though Jodie Foster's character in "Silence of the Lambs" is being diminished by the men around her, she still felt like a woman, not a shrinking violet. She can hardly make her voice heard, she moves suspiciously slow in every scene and she just never seems to be up to the job. The only thing she might have going for her is that "psychic" vibe, but there is no backstory on how it might have helped her get into the FBI. Her mother is played by Alicia Witt. This character starts setting off warning signals when we just hear her voice over the telephone line. When we encounter her, the phrase "hoarder" comes immediately to mind. This film was produced by the company "NEON", they might just as well put neon signs around every foreshadowing twist. 

Finally, let's get to Nic Cage. The part of Longlegs is a serial killer with satanic influences. We don't get any clues to that except the cryptic messages he leaves in code, so the idea that this is a procedural investigation film goes out the window. This is an X-Files episode that was not strong enough to make it to the screen, unless you have a strong visual hook. Enter Nicholas Cage, in make-up that renders him unrecognizable, and with mannerisms that would set off an air raid siren for every police official within a hundred miles of him. Cage screeches through some dialogue, pops his eyes out, and contorts his body enough to be creepy to look at. Who in their right mind would let a character like this any where near their family?  When we get an exposition dump at the start of the third act, we are asked to accept some incredulous ideas and just go along with them because we now get to see some flashbacks. This film tries to make a mystery of the means of killing, rather than exploiting the supernatural and satanic story that is really there. 

I have been an outlier before on some horror based films. I disliked "The VVitch", hated "The Lighthouse", laughed at "US" and now I am dismissing "Longlegs". I don't have to have something conventional, but I do need something that is coherent and does not insult my intelligence, a standard that this film cannot meet.  

Dream Scenario

 

Nicolas Cage is not only a fine actor, and an interesting character, but he has also become a somewhat cultural icon in the cinema world. His quirky performances intrigue audiences, and the shift in his career to quick, often violent direct to video fare has sometimes diminished his star but not the iconic status. If anything, those plethora of forgettable action films have created an even bigger footprint for social impact by painting his career with a slightly damaged tint. With that in mind it is perhaps essential that he is the star of the new film "Dream Scenario". In some ways it reflects the trajectory of his own story. 

The central character of Paul Matthews is a perfectly nice guy, but a bit of a shlub.  He is enthusiastic when teaching his classes, but like many college professors, his enthusiasm is not enough to encourage his students. At home, he seems to have a playful relationship with his somewhat emasculating wife, but it is never as warm as a deep relationship needs to be. His teen daughters regard him with the parental distain that most teens have, although there is love and not anger there. He is an everyman without any special or exceptional gift. That is until he starts appearing in other people's dreams. At first he is merely a passive observer, much as he is in life. Yet the phenomena of his presence in so many other people's dreams, makes his everyday status disappear in a flurry of social media activity. 

At this point, the film seems to become a vehicle for criticism of our obsessions with fame. Does going "viral" have any worth? Will it give a person the power to expand their horizons? That is the existential question of the film. Paul has to confront the shortcomings in his life in some fairly brutal ways. The screenplay is not just focused on Paul, although he is the catalyst for events, it also questions our gullibility as to what this sort of fame might mean. There is a sequence, which is painful to watch, where an internet start up, struggles to spin Paul's fame into gold. The monetization of our lives is critiqued by a pitch for a soda product. 

Cage brings an overwhelming sense of being overwhelmed to the film. He is oblivious at first to the dangers the scenario entails, and when real life intrudes on the viral mania, it becomes humiliating and provokes a change in the nature of his existence in other peoples dreams. That shift produces the inevitable canceling of Paul, thus offering a further negative judgment of our social media dominated society. Cage conveys futility in a way that reminds me of that scene in Fargo, where William H. Macy is scraping off the window of his car after being frustrated by his father-in-law. Arms flapping in fury and incapable of expressing it in words. 

The film is comedic at first but it makes some dark turns that will leave you a little down at the end. Not that a film needs to be upbeat, but this one is being sold as a light comedy, and that is not what it is. This film reminded me a bit of "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" with Ben Stiller from a few years ago. There are some insightful moments that are amusing, but it goes deep and that can be a bit of a downer after the comic moments. 

Valley Girl-Paramount Summer Classic Films Series

 

This entry will sometimes be less review and more nostalgia piece. I never shy away from sharing personal experiences about movies, that is why I started writing in the first place. If you don't know or care about me, it will be easy to ignore a lot of what I am going to talk about here. If you have a little patience and a forgiving heart, you may find some stories worth reading. 

Seeing this film on the big screen was always going to be a challenge for me, this is one of my late wife's two favorite films. She loved this movie from the first time we saw it in theaters, where we sat through it twice, separated by a bad Cheech and Chong film. After that, it was complete surrender. We saw it a few more times while it was in first run, and then it became a perennial favorite around the house. When the company with the rights was slow to put it out on DVD, I won an out of print Laserdisc copy on an ebay listing, by paying $70, more than twice what the original price would have been. 

It's easy to see why this movie can remain popular forty years after bursting into our consciousness, it's a retelling of Romeo and Juliet with a happy ending. The mismatched cultural divide is pretty significant in the teen years. Young people are struggling to find a place where they fit in and that's why Julie, our heroine, is having a tough time. Even though her peer group acknowledges that Randy, our hero, is hot, they see him as an outsider. Different clothes, different music, different lifestyles mean that the divide is substantial enough to drive a wedge between two lovebirds that have been growing together for a time. 

The audience today, swooned at Randy at the beach, but laughed at his appearance when he and his buddy crash the party. The punk aesthetic embraced by Randy is a rejection of all that she and her friends use to create their identities. Nicolas Cage plays Randy like a smitten puppy dog who has a bone he won't give up, even to be with his dream girl. At one point he even verbalizes his distain for her culture when they venture to the club that is his second home. However, it begins to dawn on him that he needs to live in her world as well as hers. Cue the montage that has them at the mall, the club, the movies and all after he concedes that her parents seem to be ok. All of this takes place while the world embraces Modern English's one big hit "I Melt with You". The new wave band may have had the apocalypse on their minds when they wrote it, but after it's use in this film, it will always be a romantic song. 

There is so much humor in the film, it is easy to forget some dark moments. Tommy, Julie's old boyfriend, is a manipulative bully, who is likely to make her life miserable if she stays with him. It's true that the film introduced us to Nicolas Cage, but some other fine actors are in the movie as well. Michael Bowen who plays Tommy here, goes on the play the loathsome neo-Nazi Uncle Jack in the last season of Breaking Bad and a go to for Quentin Tarantino when an ass is needed. I can't say that Cameron Dye as Fred went on to stardom, but he has worked steadily. Fred was the perfect comic foil for Randy and the kind if  who pushes the right buttons in the wrong way. Dye's performance here delights me. If there is an underappreciated contributor to the film, it is the late Fredrick Forrest, who plays Julie's hippie Dad. He offers an adult view of what the kids are going through and he is supportive without getting maudlin. Forrest is also quite funny and matches up well with Collen Camp as Julie's Mother.

There are some side stories that were never going to go anyplace major in the film, but which offer some good background on the teen culture. Suzie likes Skip, who has a Mrs. Robinson interest in her step mother. Loryn gets used by Tommy and glares at him for the rest of the movie. Stacey never quite warms up to Fred, but does get to feel the sting of disappointment in her efforts to thwart Randy and Julie as a couple.

The soundtrack for this movie is filled with nostalgia from my years working in the Valley and commuting around L.A. while listening to KROQ. Sparks, Gary Myrick, The Plimsouls and Josie Cotten are all heard  in the film, and the Plimsouls and Cotten get substantial screen time, cementing my image of the music scene of 1983. 

I teared up a couple of times at the memory of how much my wife and I loved hearing "Monster of Love" as the soundtrack of a surprise seduction. That montage scene also provoked some water works, just because young love is precious and the sequence reminded me of my own life, enough that I could feel the moments even though I was older when the film came out. 

The audience at the State Theater was packed, I ended up sitting in the third row, a little close but fine. Everyone laughed and cheered and cried at the right moments. Maybe like me, they were remembering an earlier time, or maybe it's just that romance never dies. 

Renfield

 

The best thing that "Renfield" has going for it, is the demented, ham fisted performance by Nicolas Cage as Dracula. He is the antagonist in the story and is mostly a secondary lead to Nicholas Hoult as the titular character. Hoult is great too, but it is the make-up heavy visage of the Count that you will remember if you see this film. From the very beginning, when Cage and Hoult are digitally inserted into the original 1931 version of the film, I was hooked into the story, regardless of where it ultimately was going. 

This is decidedly a comedy rather than a horror film. There is not really a sense of dread so much as an expectation of violence. So it is also an action film, although one with an unconventional premise. Renfield has decided to break his codependency with the count, and try to make up for a lot of horrible things that he has done. Making amends is complicated when you are for the most part, a contributor to the longest murder spree in history. The conflicted servant seems like a decent guy, despite enabling a monster for almost a century. That we can relate to the character is the gift of Hoult, who manages to convey a puppy dog like sincerity, even when dragging dead bodies across the floor to his master. 

In trying to flesh out the story, the film makers have borrowed a subplot from the long forgotten, "Innocent Blood" from 1992. That story mixed vampires with mobsters and "Renfield" does the same thing to create more confrontations for Hoult's character and a threat for Dracula to expand on. It also justifies the addition of Awkwafina to the cast, as a smart mouthed cop who both backs up Renfield and pursues him as a suspect. There is also a romantic element to her presence, which is mostly discrete but makes the film more conventional than it needs to be.

Cage gets a mouthful of fangs to emote through, and that is fun to watch. Dracula in the story has been repeatedly stopped by good guys and it doesn't end with his death so much as a fall in fortunes that takes a while to recover from. This feels like it is borrowed from "Interview with the Vampire", as Lestat had to lay in a hole in the ground for a long time before being revived. The decrepit make up effects here are stellar and the incremental improvements are faithful to the story. So the technical elements of the film are top notch.

The action sequences are reminiscent of a thousand recent films in which the fights are staged with wire work, CGI and physics defying visual movements. There are also copious amounts of CGi blood and dismembered body parts. That is the stuff that is used for the extreme humor that a movie such as this is designed to take advantage of. The use of a persons limbs as projectiles that another person will be impaled on is both disturbing and amusing. I suspect that if you are inclined to see this film, those will be the kinds of moments that you are looking for, congratulations, you will find plenty of them.

"Renfield" is not going to set the movie world on fire, but it does entertain in the lane that it is driving in. There are a lot of gruesome laughs to be had and a fun performance from Nic Cage. So I can't think of a reason to skip it, even if in the long run it is not a substantial film. The idea for the concept is what makes this worthwhile, but it is not a very deep idea in the first place. Dwight Frye has nothing to worry about. 

The TSA Trays at the Airport in L.A.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

 

This is the longest I have gone between seeing a new film in a theater and having a post for it here on the blog. You think for a guy who is retired, I'd have plenty of time for the content I post here, but my life is never as simple as I think it is going to be. For instance, on the Lambcast, of which I am the host, I had my friend and previous cohost Jay Cluitt of Deep Blue Sea: The Podcast, host in my place, because I was in California for the TCM Film Festival the weekend this opened. The podcast records on Sunday, I could not start editing it until Tuesday, and I wanted to get the post up on time, so I edited the podcast before seeing the movie myself. The guests and Jay were pretty good about not giving too much away, but I did have to hum to myself in a couple of places while still trying to make the recording presentable.

It has been a week since I saw the movie and I am happy to say that if I had been on the podcast, my reaction would have mirrored the other guests. "Massive Talent" is one of the most meta, self aware projects you can imagine, while still being sincere and a real movie. It is not all jokes about Nicholas Cage and his eccentricities, which he seems willing to acknowledge, it is also a buddy picture and an action adventure film. The action adventure part is not as effective as it could be because director, Tom Gormican, is no Michael Bay. The stunts and action remain in a lower budget range and they are a little too much by the numbers, but the relationship material sings.

Cage is terrific, playing a fictionalized version of himself and mocking some of his own predilections as an actor. His esoteric delivery style mixed with his true skill at dramatics helps keep this from flying off the rails as a simple parody film. He underplays the scenes with the Hollywood types and hams it up with the gangsters that the film has him get mixed up in. Pedro Pascal is hilarious as the super-fan Javi, a rich guy willing to go to any length to get Nic Cage to do a movie he has written out of love for the actor. Their relationship is the core of the picture and it is developed pretty well. The scenes of them bonding are well thought out, and then they are subverted by a couple of film tropes that are obvious but fun. There are a lot of chase scenes, and there are a couple of misunderstandings that could have come out of any 1970s sitcom. The most out of place but still fun example is a sequence where the pair have dropped acid and are operating a vehicle and living with a huge amount of paranoia.

The family issues that the screen writer/director and his collaborator tack on to the movie feel a bit off. They seem to miss some of the humorous elements of Cage's real life family history and instead create a fictional conflict that is merely a convivence for the action plot that takes over in the second half. That was probably going to be necessary for Cage to sign on for in the first place, Five marriages seems like it would be fertile ground for some humor, especially the one relationship with the only child of the greatest entertainer to ever touch the stage. My guess is that Cage would be less light hearted about those issues than the professional ups and downs he has faced.

Here is a link to the Lambcast I mentioned earlier. I agree with everyone.